Effects of auditory and visual stimuli on motor facilitation of speech muscles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was applied to the left motor cortex during presentation of video and audio speech stimuli. Motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were recorded from the right orbicularis oris muscle which is activated during pronunciation of the consonant /ba/ but not the consonant /ta/. Subjects were instructed to pay attention to six types of stimuli video presentation of the consonant /ba/, audio presentation of /ba/, audio and video presentation of /ba/, video presentation of /ta/, audio presentation of /ba/ with time-locked video presentation of video /ta/, and the face of the speaker when he was silent. The MEPs were enhanced only when subjects were visually presented with the consonant /ba/. Auditory presentations of the same consonant failed to elicit similar enhancement. The results from visual observation of the consonant /ba/ support other studies of motor facilitation in limb control research in monkeys and humans. In these studies observation of a motor action present in the repertoire of the animal results in enhanced MEPs representing automatic, covert retrieval of the matching action in the premotor cortex. This retrieval is, however, modality dependent. Auditorily presented signals do not trigger action retrieval from the premotor cortex in an identical way.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".